have seen this video with as many times, is just fine. there is wonderful, was not made into a fur coat, but i must admit it did much later died. neil: if the president wants to stop these protests, should he take a cue from his predecessor, ronald reagan? [captioning made possible by fox news channel] captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org-- neil: historic anniversary for you. it was 1981. then-president ronald reagan signed his tax cuts into law. a huge event this day. many believe it helped create a generational economic boom. 20 years later, the fog may have lifted, but america's future is still far from clear. president pushing for a trillion-dollar health care plan, when many americans fear could be leading to deficits and tax hikes. should the president take a tips from the gipper and be cutting those taxes?

it is a sort of an auspicious occasion, is it not, recognizing a guy who brought in the biggest tax cuts in american history and a fellow who some say is going to be doing the biggest government push in american history? what do you think? >> thank you for letting me talk about my favorite subject, which is those deeper tax cuts -- gipper tax cuts. do you know where ronald reagan was when he was signing that bill? neil: not in washington. >> he was at the reagan ranch in santa barbara, and i was there exactly this time last year, giving a talk. this was a seminal event in american economic history. there is no question about it. if you look at what happened before the tax cuts and what happened after, we have been in a 15-year bear market. the stock market had lost 15% of its value during the 1970's, and

the combination of those tax cuts where we took the top tax rate down from 7% to 50% and a curious later, all the way down to 28%, and in combination with reduction in inflation, that was engineered by president reagan and paul volcker, that caused this massive bull market and the huge increase in jobs, and i think you let up with this exactly right. maybe barack obama would be smart to take a page out of his playbook. neil: i did not realize the degree to which taxes across the board were cut back then, that even those in the $30,000 to $35,000 income bracket retained close to 40%. >> can i interrupt you on one point? people forget one of the aspects of that tax cut when people talk about the tax cuts for the rich. one of the most important aspects is when we brought into

place the indexing of the tax brackets. the reason all these middle- class people were paying 40% tax rates is because you have the high inflation, so their nominal incomes were growing up, pushing them into higher brackets as their purchasing power was going down. neil: to go back there, it was another year later, and ronald reagan was still very low in the polls, the demonstrative effects of this tax cut still were not being realized. a lot of folks were saying this guy had a disaster on his hands, so it took more than a year to realize that something was jelling here. in fact, the bull market that we no action we started a year ago, -- 28 years ago this very week. people forget -- 27, i should say. it took a full year to realize how long this would be to sink in. this president, his people say for those who label this spending initiatives and

nonstarter, ironically, they go back to that as saying they said the same of ronald reagan's tax- cut initiatives. >> by the way, you know from reading the book why it took a year for that expansion to happen. it was because we faced in those tax cuts over two or three years. that was one of the mistakes. we should have just lowered them away. one of the things i find objectionable about the health care bill, putting aside the policy, is the way that it is paid for. this does not get enough attention. we talked about this a couple weeks ago. there's a big payroll tax increase on small business supporters of 8% to provide health care for their workers. this is exactly the opposite of what we did in the early 1980's. you are making it more punitive for employers to hire new workers at exactly the time we want them to be hiring. neil: very quickly, final note on this president trying to you'd -- trying to use his own charisma, just like ronald

reagan did, to push the opposite in pitching what he wants. what you think of that? >> i have been in politics for 26 years. the three politicians who just stood above the rest in terms of charisma were ronald reagan, bill clinton, and barack obama. this guy has all the communication skills. the problem is he is communicating all the wrong ideas. neil: we shall see. that was then, this is now. thanks. opposition growing to the president's health-care plan among independents. a new "usa today" poll finds that independence sympathize more with protesters. does that spell trouble for the president? let's ask the former pennsylvania governor and homeland security secretary. good to have you. you as governor also instituted a big tax cuts to turn your state around. on this, a day we look back at

the reagan tax cuts 28 years ago. is that the message, or is that getting lost in the message? >> i certainly enjoyed your conversation with your earlier guests. i was elected to congress back in 1982 with double-digit inflation, double-digit unemployment, double-digit interest rates, and ronald reagan did pretty much the opposite of what president obama is doing. the notion that they both had charisma -- you can have charisma, but if your message does not resonate and does not have the outcome that you seek -- and i think most americans have figured out that a growing government does not put more money in their pocket or more jobs in the neighborhoods -- that is why you are seeing so much anxiety and so much at these meetings. neil: when you look back to the tax cuts, everyone was saying it would create huge deficits, and we did get deficits, but it was 60 -- 6% of gdp. today, they make those deficits

look like chump change. what has changed? do we just have a frozen reaction to these numbers now? >> i think the dynamics have clearly changed. you look at the numbers in the house and senate, and the president has, i think, a certain philosophy that is not center-right, and most americans are moderate to conservative when it comes to the role of government, the size of government, and the chunks in taxes they are taking out of their paycheck, but because they have had so much overwhelming numbers in the house and senate, there has been a cramdown in the stimulus package, and everybody is beginning to realize we're going to spend nearly one trillion dollars. only about 10% or 15% of that is out the door, but we are seeing the economy come back slowly but surely, and inevitably, it will be back. as more government spending create more jobs in the private sector? again, you come back and look at ronald reagan's vision.

it is different, but the outcome was different as well. now, we are looking at three times the deficit. more government spending does not get you out of the deficit. neil: there will be people looking at those same improving numbers and say that it is under this president's watch that things are looking better. the devil may be in the details, but the overall picture looks fine. the president is taking credit for, as would be is right as the leader at the time, so he is going to say it is suspending and his stimulus. >> here is an opportunity that those who really are concerned about the massive infusion of spending and potential spending associated with the stimulus package and health care bill and some of the other proposals -- it is a great opportunity for the republican party and moderate democrats to just stand up and say enough is enough. the economy is slowly, as it

often does, moving back, and it is going to take some time. just as reagan's tax cuts took time. philosophically, i do not think too many americans believe that tripling the deficits with more government programs is going to give them stability in the workforce or put their neighbor back to work. at the end of the day, most people want to go to work. we need good public sector jobs. we have plenty of those. but we need more private-sector jobs. you do not grow those jobs with more government spending. neil: do you think of your old party colleague, now a democrat, senator arlen specter? having a devil of a time at these health care forums that he is leading. how is he looking to you? >> i think one of the incredible ironies is that senator specter chose to leave the republican

party because he felt he would lose to pad and moved over to the democrat party, and numbers are getting closer and closer every day. it would be an incredible irony is in order to avoid defeat he walked into the jaws of defeat on the side of it -- the other side of the aisle. he is a tireless and indefatigable campaigner. but i think that has an excellent chance of defeating whoever prevails. neil: this health-care fails, there is prevailing wisdom that it will be the fault of republicans, and when the dust settles, for whatever reason, and there are plenty of reasons why health care could suffer for this reform could suffer, it was the republicans once again, as they did with bill clinton, who torpedoed it. many strategists tell me that for whatever reasons, that is something that democrats are going to stick on republicans. any time it went to move forward, they slapped him back. what should be the defense?

>> democratic colleagues have to be very careful with that line of reasoning. i think republicans -- we do need to remind americans that there are some imperfections in our health-care system. preexisting injury disqualification, affordability is an issue, and certainly, access is an issue, but we need to remind people that 85% of americans have good health care, are comfortable with their health care, and they do not want to see a government run system or something that will lead to a government-run system under the notion that they could actually reduce costs, give them greater choice. people just do not believe that, so i do not think we should wait for that debate to occur because i do think this plan is going to fail, and as republicans, we need to recognize there are three or four changes that we have to work with our democratic friends on the other side of the aisle to accomplish, but you do not have to turn the healthcare system upside down in order to deal with issues of access,

affordability, and preexisting injury and illness. neil: thank you very much for your time. well, he has had it, and he is putting lawmakers on notice. >> to whoever -- democrat or republican -- [inaudible] neil: you are going to meet him next. and forget those high gas prices. the white house -- why the fight over of all things sugar to have us all pain here. he ran off with his secretary! she's 23 years old!

- oh, come on. - enough! you get half and you get half. ( chirp ) team three, boathouse? ( chirp ) oh yeah-- his and hers.

- ( crowd gasping ) - ( chirp ) van gogh? ( chirp ) even steven. - ( chirp ) mansion. - ( chirp ) good to go. ( grunts ) timber! ( chirp ) boss? what do we do with the shih-tzu? - ( crowd gasps ) - ( chirp ) joint custody. - phew! - announcer: get work done now. communicate in less than a second with nextel direct connect. only on the now network. deaf, hard of hearing and people with speech disabilities access www.sprintrelay.com.

>> i'm a conservative, and what we expect is for you to fight for us. we do not want this nation to be socialists. fight for us. stand up. don't give an inch. and to whoever -- democrat or republican -- votes for this

bill, we will vote you out. neil: sat up and fighting back, taking on both sides of the aisle at a very testy time. he joins me right now. you have become a youtube star overnight. how're you doing? >> very good. how about yourself? neil: what made you stand out as -- is a lot of people look at these as republican orchestrated events, and here, you took on a republican senator, who would prove crucial in the president's wish for a bipartisan health care. he said do that, and look what happens. what was the reaction you got? >> from my perspective, i'm sitting at home on my couch, watching all these things transpire, the direction this

administration has taken, and i'm tired of the democratic leaders saying these so-called angry mobs coming out to these town hall meetings are not a representation of the people. i'm tired of them saying we the people are not the people. i do not care if it's democrat or republican. this needs to stop. as far as republican officials, they need to stop this now. they need to stand up for us because we are speaking and we are speaking loudly. stand up and stop this bill. and any republican that does vote for this bill or even if they just do not sign the bill but they are not standing up, we are going to vote you out. neil: let me ask you this -- you like senator grassley a great deal, but you are saying this is sort of like a defining moment

for you. if he goes ahead and proves to be one of these crucial sort of bipartisan swing senators in favor of health-care reform or at least along the lines that the democrats are pushing, he is in trouble with you -- did i get that right? >> he is in trouble with myself and a lot of conservatives that share my view. we will not stand for this. he is supposed to be speaking our views, our opinions, not what he thinks our opinions are. they do not know what is better for us. neil: but he and others looking at health care reform are arguing that guys like you will not like the alternative. we do not do something right now, it is going to get worse. your health care costs are going to go up a lot, and you will rue the day you stopped this. what do you say? >> i say there are many days we can -- many things we can do besides turning this into a social health care plan.

the problem is this is just the beginning of socialization. if we put this into place, there is no taking a back. this is the pivot point for our nation right now. we have to stop this. there are many different things we can do. we can open up insurance across the nation, not a state-by- state. open it up. let them compete. regardless of anything else happening here, this move towards socialist health care -- that is the beginning stages, and that is not what this country is about. as a conservative, we need to stand up. not just me. more of us need to stand up at these town hall meetings. we need to stand up and fight. not fight physically, but we need to be rational about what we're doing. no more angry mob. anger is a secondary motion. we are afraid of what is happening. neil: good luck coming out of yourself. it seems to be working. seriously, thank you for joining us.

an alarming number of americans are demanding their stimulus money back, and it is not just republicans. is congress listening? and later -- >> what you're telling me is i need to give you these people's e-mails so i can check them on a list -- i'm just asking. >> if you can figure out a better way of checking without me double checking e-mails -- neil: why fox news is proving yet again it will never be invited to christmas parties at the white house.

you all want to run your businesses more efficiently, so we've brought in a team of experts to help. one suggestion is to make your shipping more efficient with priority mail flat rate boxes from the postal service. call or go online for a free supply and up to $160 in offers from authorized postage vendors. shipping's a hassle! weighing every box... actually, with flat rate boxes you don't need to weigh anything under 70 pounds. if it fits, it ships for a low flat rate. ok, but i ship all over the country. you can ship anywhere in the country for a low flat rate. ship international, too. yes, but i ship hundreds of things, in all sizes. great, because flat rate boxes come in four sizes. call and we'll send a free supply, plus up to $160 in offers. when you're ready to ship, we'll even pick them up for free,

no matter how many you have. priority mail flat rate boxes only from the postal service. a simpler way to ship. call or go online now to get started.

neil: stimulus shock? cannot spend it? then give it back. in a brand new fox news poll, a whopping 72% of americans say

returning the unused portion of the roughly $800 billion stimulus to taxpayers would do more to boost the economy than have the government spend it. by the way, it is not just republicans saying it. this is a majority of democrats and a majority of independents. congressman, what do you make of that? >> i saw the unemployment numbers go down. i saw the trade deficit improved. we have seen the market come back 50% over the march lows. this is a business show. when you look at the business side, things are improving dramatically in our country, and now that we have the patience stabilized, the last thing we want to do is not proceed with healing what needs to be addressed. so we are going to keep going forward. the tax cuts that are part of the stimulus -- we provided tax cuts to 95% of every person in

the country, and i heard someone on earlier talking about the reagan tax cuts. these tax cuts are driven to 95% of income earners under $250,000. that is a significant part of the stimulus. neil: you realize that ronald reagan's tax cuts went to 100%, right? everyone. >> let's be clear. with the selective amnesia at times we keep forgetting about the obama tax cuts. neil: are these the same tax cuts the president said you are getting -- >> tax cuts that go forward. these are the tax cuts that are in place now. neil: i hear you. i'm saying the american people are looking at this and say we are doing ok now, improving, give the rest back. >> let me tell you this -- what we are going to do is give this economy a chance to come back. we have seen gm come out with a

new car, 230 miles per gallon. you have to be excited about that. we have the bank stabilize. we are going to make sure that we get the employment rolls up -- neil: do you need more stimulus money? the stimulus is working, the 10% or so of it that has gotten out there has done the trick. you know what i do at home if i do what needs to be done with 10%? i do not spend the other 90%. why do we have to spend the other 90%? >> president obama's administration -- this economic recovery effort is full steam ahead, and we are going to get this economy roaring back. you cannot point to a number that is poor. neil: i'm going to agree with everything you are saying, and i'm going to say that we are firing on all cylinders, which by the way, we are not, but we

are doing better, and you are absolutely right to say we are doing better, so now, i'm going to keep my power dry, the $700 billion or so that has not been spent, i'm just going to put it aside in case i need it, see how this recovery goes because we do not have much more money behind it. if it does not work out, i might take some more out, but why blow it all now? >> we have the patience stabilized. we are still in the zero are -- we are still in the or. we need to make sure the tax payments get paid out in full. these are reductions go into everyday americans. they need that money. in this bill is unemployment compensation that is needed for the people who are still jobless -- neil: how is that stimulating anything? >> there are parts of the bill that our stimulus. there are parts of the bill that are to help people through tough times. i know we do not want to talk

about the full concept of the bill, but it was to help people through tough times -- neil: i know you approaching this package, and you voted for it to support the president, and you are right, but -- >> and is working. neil: the average recession lasts more than 18 months. this one a little more than 20 months, so maybe we are just cycling out of this, and elephants to the president or anyone else, but this is just a cycle event and has nothing to do with your stimulus or the money is going toward unemployment compensation, none of that. >> all i can tell you is that if you were listening to business shows like your own five months ago or in september when this thing, the bottom fell out, the world was coming to an end, you saw what was going on in our markets, right? you saw that banking collapse. this was needed help, and we are going to follow through on this

program. neil: i tell you what -- you know what? you are a very -- congressman, you are a very smart, patriotic american, so i take it at your word that you were watching this show five or six months ago, you will hear that we were saying that, that very little of this stimulus would get out, and we would probably cycle out of this recession. if you were listening to the show's six months prior to that at the start of the financial crisis when we had a different president in office, and he was bailing out and rescuing banks and later of the companies, we said then as we later said under this president that it would be a mistake. if you have been listening then and even before then, you would have realized that we would have trusted the markets and the economic cycle to get out of this mess and not the government, right? >> look at the bloomberg survey of economists. you see that there is a general consensus that we are headed in the right direction. we are not going to pull back. we are going to go forward.

neil: you also know from that survey, not a one credits that stimulus. >> let the republicans become accountable for the bush economy. neil: you are right, congressman. >> you are always right. neil: you are always right. >> no, i'm on neil: the left -- no, i'm on the left. neil: your so smooth, i don't understand what you're saying, but you leave me in oawe. forget gas prices, why should there is going to give you sticker shock. how is it people are getting e- mails from the white house who never signed up to get e-mails from the white house? could it have something to do with that snitch site? my mother made the best toffee in the world. it's delicious.

so now we've turned her toffee into a business. my goal was to take an idea and make it happen. i'm janet long and i formed my toffee company through legalzoom. i never really thought i would make money doing what i love. robert shapiro: we created legalzoom to help people start their business and launch their dreams. go to legalzoom.com today and make your business dream a reality. at legalzoom.com we put the law on your side.

neil: forget high gas prices. it is a sugar high that could get you. warnings that supplies are dwindling fast and prices are rising even faster. you are going to get hit pretty much everywhere. in fact, you already are. >> every day here on the fox business network, we talk about

global commodity prices. oil trading inversely with the dollar. even corn close association with the ethanol blend of a, but sugar grows on trees. almost. my nephew consumes the equivalent of a small countries import quota just over the holidays. we need to start getting concerned about a shortage in sugar. general mills, kraft, and hershey recently submitted a letter to the ever closer secretary urging immediate government action to end or reduce import tariffs restricting the amount of less expensive for and produce sugar available for purchase. u.s. food producers in a typical year might pay as much as twice the growing global rate for sugar, and this year, that rate is at a 28-year high.

in this letter to the agriculture department, these companies claim that there is it -- that this intending shortage will force them to pass those prices on to the consumer and possibly even eliminate some jobs. this will only hurt -- this will not only hurt those of us who love sweets, but most breads -- loaded with sugar. half a cup of canned spaghetti sauce -- 12 grams. the cereal with the highest sugar content -- raisin bran. 20 grams of sugar. that is about 5 teaspoons in every helping. once again, the obama administration is forced to walk a fine line. like so many government programs, these subsidies in the form of tariffs hurt private enterprise. albeit, with this one, the caveat is that it helps american farmers. still, let's let true market principles takeover. do we need to have a town hall meetings and tea party about sugar, too? let's stop cash for cupcakes.

neil: great job as always. >> i'll split this with you. neil: we are not splitting. just give it to me. my next guest says this whole mess is just the white house's didn't that tax. what is really going on here? >> i think the fact that the white house is not moving on this and the fact that it does not seem to be a priority -- they are continuing a long standing, foolish policy that forces us to pay billions of dollars more for sugar -- is a deliberate policy choice. want us to pay more. they want to manage our lives. they want -- they do not want us to do unhealthy things. we already saw the cigarette tax rates. we have seen things like the sugar beverage tax floated as a way to pay for health care, and i think this is all part of an agenda for the government to micromanage what we can and cannot do in our lives.

neil: we have a monsoon in india, and we have had adverse weather that was affecting the price of this stuff long before the rumors of what the administration was trying to do on imports. >> you are right. this is a longstanding bonehead policy we have had of having price supports that makes sense only for political reasons because they help the farmers in the upper midwest and cane farmers, but the fact is we are now at a crisis point. world prices are the highest they have been in 30 years -- oil prices are the highest they have been in 30 years. we are still paying a boat load in the u.s. because of these policies we have. neil: you can educate me. is it what they are doing or what countries like brazil are doing, you know, shipping a lot of their attention to at an all -- ethanol and taking a lot of

corn out of the market? i talked about the weather in india and how that is affecting things. that may be where they are looking at a plot where there might not be one. >> i do not think it is a plot. i would not go that far, and the biggest factor is that they are burning sugar in brazil, burning about half of their sugar crop, which used to go into world markets, but the reality still is we have policies in place that force us to pay higher than world prices for sugar, and we really want to do what is best for the economy and what is best for consumers, it would make sense to suspend those during a time of very high prices, which is what we're looking at, and we have not seen any move from this white house to do that, and i think that is because they enjoy prices being high. neil: thank you very much. good seeing you. all right, now, to the iowa state fair. no sugar shortage there. cotton candy, soda, funnel cakes. carl cameron there to talk

health care reform and what a regular folks are sweet or sour on it? >> i'm partial to pork chops on a stick. 1 million people are going to come to the state fair in the next few days. i know, like so many other states -- iowa, like so many other states, has had health care front page news for days now. both senators have heard an earful from their constituencies. at the state fair, it is crowded. the menu is not exactly heart healthy, but everybody is aware of the health-care debate, and it does not take long to find out that it is not just in this town halls where folks have gotten the talking points and had begun to understand both sides of the issue. the opposition in the polls shows it is gaining some ground. this is just the first person we asked what he thought about it. listen to this. >> i think private individuals should have their own health

care if they want health care. i do not think we should be socialized. i think we are represented republic, not a communist nation. >> that is obviously the opposition. we talked to two other people, and we got all of 1/3 of the debate. we saw someone who said we have to do something so folks who do not have insurance can get it, and the third prison, perhaps the most knowledgeable, said the house and senate have not passed anything yet. and we really do not know what we are talking about until the legislators get some of their neil: work finished still thinking about that porkchop on a stick. meanwhile, millions who do not have cars are still on the road and not eligible for this cash for clunkers plan. and this you have to see. you know what's complicated? shipping. shipping's complicated. not really.

with priority mail flat rate boxes from the postal service shipping is easy. if it fits, it ships anywhere in the country for a low flat rate. that's not complicated. come on. how about...a handshake. alright. priority mail flat rate boxes only from the postal service. a simpler way to ship. ...or if you're already sick... ...or if you lose your job. your health insurance shouldn't either. so let's fix health care. if everyone's covered, we can make health care as affordable as possible. and the words "pre-existing condition" become a thing of the past... we're america's health insurance companies. supporting bipartisan reform that congress can build on.

neil: all right, the cash for

clunkers program is supposed to get gas-guzzlers' of the road. a new report shows that 5 million of the dirtiest cars are not eligible because congress caved to lobbyists. >> unfortunately, things are not working as we originally planned. so many cars are ineligible, and the e-mails i get from viewers are that they are just so disappointed -- neil: why aren't they? >> you have cavaliers, exports -- escorts, pretty much any isuzu product, commercial products. i know the market wants to help those people, but some people cannot afford to keep those cards. some cars are just worn out. neil: the administration argues we are getting a lot of congress. not nearly as many as we thought, according to you. >> right. the first $1 million would have

bought to ledger 40,000 cars, so we went against what i thought was a good idea and put another $2 billion into a program that really limited a lot of people. do we really think there are another 500,000 more consumers who can afford to purchase a car or are eligible? the answer is no. neil: they say there is still heightened interest, but you think it is waning fast? >> it has dropped off. many dealers are concerned. they are not getting money from the government. just are asking around, and you'll find that there are cars on the lots. they are happy because they are selling cars, and that is the best part of the program. they are getting cars of lots, helping small dealers. that is great for the little villages and towns, but for us as the average consumer, many of us are not eligible, and we have cars that should have been eligible, and we were excluded. neil: what happens to the cars? >> they are supposed to be destroyed. liquid glass goes into the

engine, and across the cars, filling landfills, which we have talked about in the past, but a lot of dealers are sitting on cars and waiting to make deliveries to consumers because they do not know if they are getting their money. they want the paperwork, and once they get it, they want to make sure they are getting the money. neil: great seeing you again. thank you very much. retail sales are clucking out. this, despite the old clunkers program. my next guest says only huge bargains are going to get people's shopping. in retail expert joins us now. what is weird is we thought that would be a big boost to retail sales. what happened? >> you would think it would be a big retail goods, but it was not. right now, retailers are in a panic, and just like cash for clunkers, retailers are going to start severely discounting their merchandise. neil: if big clunker rebates and all did not do it -- and to be

fair, that was the last week in july, so we might see something in august -- are americans actually precondition to a substantial sales or they do not come out of their homes? >> that is a really good point you make. i do think americans are precondition, especially since we have been seeing those sales in september of last year. you're going to see a lot of consumers watching those discounts on clothing, on home goods, things like milk, and retailers now, not only are they discounting items, but they are doing incentives for the consumer, putting together these programs, these extra special programs where people can get even more discounts if they sign up for this e-mail or private shopping network or one of these on-line only specials. neil: so you are not in the camp that says what we are seeing is just a minor pickup in the consumer is slowly coming back? you are not convinced? >> no, because look at the

unemployment numbers. even though the dow is doing well, and employment numbers say something completely different, and window start coming down, that is when we are going to see a difference in how the consumer spends. neil: thank you very much. good seeing you. there is another list from the white house, and this one got our major garrett in an ugly exchange. >> i understand. >> you are asking me if they are on the list. if you could figure out a different way of checking without asking me to double check the names, and happy to. . .

neil: all right, a fox news alert for you. the white house compiling a healthcare list to push its plan. it is a question of major garrett was trying to get a question to and then it got down to this. >> do you in any way see data bases or information about people who might be on that

list? >> i would have to check on that. >> how do they get an e-mail from the white house when they never asked for one. >> i would be interested to see who you got the e-mail from and whether ororot they're on the list. let me finish with major. again, i just want to be clear. >> i need to give you these people's e-mail so you can check them on a list. >> you are asking me if they're on a list. i would need to double-check the name. >> they said they never asked for an e-mail from the white house. >> what i'm saying is i don't know -- i'd have to look and see. >> you don't have an explanation for someone who never signed up to get an e-mail from the white house got one? >> i can't give you an answer because you might impugn the motives of the answer.

>> why don't you answer it? >> because of the way you phrased your follow-up. i have to look at what you got, major. i appreciate the fact that i have omnipotent clarity as to what you received in your e-mail box today. >> you don't have to impugn anything. i am telling you what i got, e-mails from people who say they got e-mails from you without ever signing up for anything. neil: all righty, that went well. so, major, if you're trying to get out of the doghouse, and this little exchange today did not seem to foster that process. how is it going now? >> neil, i'm not in the doghouse, i don't try to get out of the doghouse, i don't try to get into a doghouse. i just try to ask questions. neil: let me be the first to tell you you are in the doghouse. >> be that as it may, i will be at the white house every day. david axle axelrod sent out a

healthcare message on behalf of the president's healthcare initiative. people said i never engaged the white house on a website and never sought anything p from the white house, so how did i get this? i didn't really -- if folks watch "special report" tonight, they will see i'm doing a separate store on healthcare about biologics, which is interesting in itself but i didn't intend this to become an enormous con troe sers si -- controversy. i just wanted to find out how people who never asked for information from the white house on healthcare or anything would find e-mails from the president's senior advisor in their e-mail in-box. i would say right now it's slow going. things are frosty but i didn't go the briefing for the agenda. my appearance on your show is not evidence i had an agenda. i'm just trying to find out an answer to what i think is an jit ma question -- a legitimate question. neil: the issue is whether from the white house these sort of e-mails were being sourced, and

that would be a bit of a game changer, would it not? >> if it's true, and i have no evidence to suggest that it is, neil. i'm just asking. i will tell you one thing legitimately that set robert gibbs on edge and we had a spirited conversation after the briefing about this was in the preface to one of my questions, mentioned organizing for america, a political arm of the democratic national committee and robert said, look, stop saying that there is any possibility that organizing for america or the d.n.c. and the white house could have similar lists or use similar lists that. upset him, probably legitimately, and i should not have done that because there is no evidence that the democratic national committee comes anywhere near the white house in this healthcare debate or anything else. that set robert on edge, but i still want to find out answers to these other questions about is there a list at the white house and how they obtain e-mail addressed from people who never asked them for anything on this or any other issue.

neil: that i understand. >> when we know more, we will tell you more. >> obviously from a diner across the street. glenn beck, now. medicare.

it doesn't cover everything. and what it doesn't cover can cost you some money. that's why you should consider... an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan... insured by united healthcare insurance company. it can help cover some of what medicare doesn't... so you could save up to thousands of dollars... in out-of-pocket expenses. call now for this free information kit... and medicare guide. if you're turning 65 or you're already on medicare, you should know about this card; it's the only one of its kind... that carries the aarp name -- see if it's right for you. you choose your doctor. you choose your hospital. there are no networks and no referrals needed. help protect yourself from some of what medicare doesn't cover. save up to thousands of dollars... on potential out-of-pocket expenses... with an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan... insured by united healthcare insurance company. call now for your free information kit...